Sacred Heart University Review Volume 22 Issue 1 Sacred Heart University Review, Volume XXII, Article 3 Number 1, Spring 2002 March 2010 Leonardo and the Creative Act Charles M. Rosenberg Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/shureview Recommended Citation Rosenberg, Charles M. (2010) "Leonardo and the Creative Act," Sacred Heart University Review: Vol. 22 : Iss. 1 , Article 3. Available at: http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/shureview/vol22/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the SHU Press Publications at DigitalCommons@SHU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Sacred Heart University Review by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@SHU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Leonardo and the Creative Act Cover Page Footnote Charles M. Rosenberg is Professor of Art History at the University of Notre Dame. This talk was delivered on July 10, 2003, at Sacred Heart University as the Hesburgh Lecture, sponsored by the Master of Arts in Learning Program of Sacred Heart and the Notre Dame Alumni Club of Fairfield, Connecticut. This article is available in Sacred Heart University Review: http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/shureview/vol22/iss1/3 Rosenberg: Leonardo and the Creative Act 1 Figure 1: Leonardo da Vinci, Mona Lisa 2 Figure 2: Leonardo da Vinci, Last Supper Published by DigitalCommons@SHU, 2002 1 Sacred Heart University Review, Vol. 22, Iss. 1 [2002], Art. 3 CHARLES M. ROSENBERG ──────────────── Leonardo and the Creative Act In the middle of the sixteenth century, Giorgio Vasari, the Aretine architect, painter, and art theorist, published a collection of biographies of the most eminent architects, painters, and sculptors of the Renaissance.1 He divided his account into three parts or ages. The first age, the fourteenth century, was dominated by Giotto. According to Vasari, it was during this period that art was brought out of the darkness of the medieval, Byzantine style and given a ``Roman tongue.'' Art began to be based upon the observation of nature and of human emotions, and the transcendental began to be refashioned in more worldly and human terms. The second period ─ exemplified by such figures as Ghiberti, Donatello, Brunelleschi, and Masaccio ─ was the ``adolescence of art.'' During this age, which roughly corresponds to the first three-quarters of the fifteenth century, artists learned to refine their representational tools. As a result an even greater degree of verism, or ``truth to nature,'' was achieved. But something was still missing, something that was only attained in the third age, when, according to Vasari, art was actually able to surpass nature. The particular accomplishment of the masters who worked in this final period was not simply a mastery of representation, but what Vasari termed ``a freedom within the rules,'' a freedom that demanded ``a rich variety of invention [and] a sure perception of beauty, even in the smallest detail.'' _______________ Charles M. Rosenberg is Professor of Art History at the University of Notre Dame. This talk was delivered on July 10, 2003, at Sacred Heart University as http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/shureview/vol22/iss1/3 2 Rosenberg: Leonardo and the Creative Act 46 CHARLES M. ROSENBERG the Hesburgh Lecture, sponsored by the Master of Arts in Learning Program of Sacred Heart and the Notre Dame Alumni Club of Fairfield, Connecticut. According to Vasari, the first artist to achieve this new level of perfection was Leonardo da Vinci. At the conclusion of the preface to the Third Book, Vasari contrasted Leonardo to those who came before him: The artists [of the second period] forced themselves to try [to] do the impossible through their exertions, especially in their ugly foreshortenings and perspectives which were as disagreeable to look at as they were difficult to do. Although the greater part of their work was well designed and free from error, it still lacked any sense of liveliness as well as the harmonious blending of colors which was first seen in the works of Francia of Bologna and Pietro Perugino (and which made the people run like mad to gaze on this new, realistic beauty, as if they would never see the like again). But how wrong they were was then demonstrated for all to see in the work of Leonardo da Vinci. It was Leonardo who originated the third style or period, which we like to call the modern age; for in addition to the force and robustness of his draftsmanship and his subtle and exact reproduction of every detail in nature, he showed in his works an understanding of rule, a better knowledge of order, correct proportion, perfect design, and an inspired grace. And artist of great vision and skill and abundant resources, Leonardo may be said to have painted figures that moved and breathed.2 According to Vasari, the source of Leonardo's talent was divine, and his fame destined to be eternal: In the normal course of events many men and women are born with various remarkable qualities and talents; but occasionally, in a way that transcends nature, a single person is marvelously endowed by heaven with beauty, grace, and talent in such abundance that he leaves other men far behind, all his actions seem inspired, and indeed everything he does clearly comes from God rather than from human art. Published by DigitalCommons@SHU, 2002 3 Sacred Heart University Review, Vol. 22, Iss. 1 [2002], Art. 3 LEONARDO AND THE CREATIVE ACT 47 Everyone acknowledged that this was true of Leonardo da Vinci, an artist of outstanding physical beauty who displayed infinite grace in everything he did and who cultivated his genius so brilliantly that all problems he studied he solved with ease. He was a man of regal spirit and tremendous breadth of mind; and his name became so famous that not only was he esteemed during his lifetime but his reputation endured and became even greater after his death.3 Vasari's observations regarding the endurance of Leonardo's reputation certainly seem equally true today. The artist has become a paradigm of invention and universality, and his paintings, especially the Last Supper and the still enigmatic Mona Lisa, have attained the status of cultural icons. These two works in particular are so ingrained in the popular imagination that film makers, advertisers, and satirists quote them with absolute confidence. Yet, ironically, because these two works are so familiar, it is almost impossible to see them, not only physically, because of the crowds, but, more important, conceptually. What I propose to do is to look closely at these two paintings ─ one a secular portrait, the other a profound religious narrative ─ in an effort to rediscover what it is about them that has captivated viewers from the moment of their creation. Along the way I will also try to elucidate some of the conceptual strategies that Leonardo employed in creating these masterpieces. The Mona Lisa (fig.1) is a relatively late work. It was probably begun by Leonardo sometime between 1503 and 1506, and completed about a decade later, quite possibly during Leonardo's final few years at the court of Francis I in Amboise. (Leonardo was born in 1452 and died in 1519.)4 Although the identity of the sitter has been disputed ─ some historians have suggested that it really represents an ideal court lady painted for Giuliano de' Medici, while computer artist Lillian Schwartz has tried to identify the painting as a feminized self-portrait ─ the general consensus is that the painting represents Lisa di Antonio Maria Gherardini, the wife of Francesco del Giocondo, a successful Florentine silk and cloth merchant. Frank Zöllner has suggested that the painting was commissioned in conjunction with Francesco's establishment of an independent household on the Via dela Stufa in 1503, and then left unfinished when Leonardo obtained a much more http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/shureview/vol22/iss1/3 4 Rosenberg: Leonardo and the Creative Act 48 CHARLES M. ROSENBERG prestigious commission, the painting of the Battle of Anghiari in the Sala Grande of the Palazzo Vecchio.5 The Mona Lisa seems to have traveled with Leonardo throughout the remainder of his life, for it was in Milan in 1525 in the possession of his artistic heir and protege Francesco Melzi. Leonardo had left all of his notes and works of art to Melzi. Somehow the painting was acquired by the Francis I, for in 1542 it is documented as hanging in the Salle du Bain at Fountainebleau. It has remained in France ever since, hanging in its own alcove in the Louvre, where many of you may well have seen it. From the time of Vasari to the present two qualities have been acknowledged as giving the Mona Lisa its special status: Leonardo's ability to render forms in an extraordinarily convincing fashion and his investment of the sitter with a haunting psychological presence. Although Vasari probably only knew the painting by reputation, his description of it acknowledges both of these elements: If one wanted to see how faithfully art can imitate nature, one could perceive it from this head; for here Leonardo subtly reproduced every living detail. The eyes had their natural lustre and moistness, and around them were the lashes and all those rosy and pearly tints that demand the greatest delicacy of execution. The mouth, joined to the flesh-tints of the face by the red of the lips, appeared to be living flesh rather than paint. On looking closely at the pit of her throat one could swear that the pulses were beating. Altogether this picture was painted in a manner to make the most confident artist ─ no matter who ─ despair and lose heart.